Why not cross Bradford as a conciliatory prize ?

[tbtc]

Essentially there’s only two ways of doing a cross Bradford link with heavy rail:

1) at ground level, either keeping the current two stations as is, or building a level station between them and closing both. Clearly this requires lots of demolition, including several listed buildings.

2) in tunnel, which is going to need tunnelled approaches from some distance out due to the topography, and would essential cost billions.

Take your pick.

What about a sixty four span viaduct, with each span representing a different crayon from the 64 pack that Crayola do?

Precisely the same arguments applied to Merseyrail, Thameslink, Crossrail etc.

I entirely agree with you about cost etc but it depends on the value you place on the economic life of your community and on heavy rail's potential.

WAO

Thameslink and Crossrail are there because a two track platform is much more efficient than the space required for the number of services that terminated there each hour (and there were other services competing for the terminating platforms at London Bridge/ Paddington/ Liverpool Street etc, so the tunnel unlocked a lot of additional capacity)

Nothing terminated at Bradford Interchange for a long time, until the handful of GC services from London were introduced (which presumably wouldn't be running through towards Shipley, even if you did spend a billion pounds connecting Forster Square and Interchange) and laterally the hourly Huddersfield terminator

And a four platform Interchange can cope pretty well with the various Leeds - Halifax services that only dwell there for a few minutes each hour plus the hourly Huddersfield trains and the occasional GC train

So there's nothing like the same demand in Bradford

There's also the fact that Bradford doesn't have a particularly big city centre - however there's a long way from Paddington to Liverpool Street, so plenty of scope for additional stations in central London (Paddington to Liverpool Street is over four miles as the crow flies - that's almost as far as Bradford to Cleckheaton/ Bramley/ Halifax/ Bingley to put it in context). Given that Interchange at Forster Square are less than half a mile apart, you'd not be putting an additional station in between them)

Merseyrail, I can't comment on so much as it was built before my time, but the same principles apply - there are a lot of trains heading into a much bigger city centre, so they'd need a lot more space if they all terminated in central Liverpool

"Economic life of your city" - sure, sounds worthy, but what does it mean? What benefit would there be to Bradford (given that there'd be more more paths at Leeds for additional services)?

As I've said before, it'd be fine if there was a through line in Bradford, great, but is there sufficient reason to spend hundreds of millions of pounds on one today?

 

[BrianW]

Precisely the same arguments applied to Merseyrail, Thameslink, Crossrail etc.

I entirely agree with you about cost etc but it depends on the value you place on the economic life of your community and on heavy rail's potential.

WAO

Maybe, if it's a no-brainer, either the people of Bradford, or of West Yorkshire, or a group of (local?) entrepreneurs will raise the funding?
The Lord Eric Pickles ex Mayor of Bradford ex UK Government Minister for Localism Line?

 

[Grumpy]

That's going to be a couple of extra trains per hour through Shipley and down the Aire Valley (i.e. the half hourly Forster Square stoppers replaced by the two Manchester trains, one Blackpool and one Halifax service) - not going to be easy!

The Airedale line is busiest between Leeds and Apperley Junction. The core service is 6 trains/hour (2 Ilkley, 2 Skipton, 2 Bradford). This rises to seven when a Lancaster or Carlisle runs. In the peak it rises to 9 as 2 extra Ilkleys run (although it's difficult to see the need for these-especially if longer trains were used).
I have no knowledge of the existing signalling capabilities but scrutiny of Realtime trains seems to indicate some actual running at 3 minute headways.
Would running 11 trains/hour (present 9 plus your 2 extra) really be beyond the wit of railwaymen? And yes I understand the need to cross trains at Apperley and Shipley

 

[WAO]

While I'm sure that the case for Bradford's crossrail is beyond dispute, its priority must be well down the list, because of its cost and disruption and because of the under-invested railway beyond. When the modern buildings in the way reach the end of their lives, then a case may be made.

EMU's (even 319's!) to Bradford (urban pop 350 000) from Leeds and later up the Calder Valley are to me much more pressing. Perhaps when the footfall at both terminals is two or three times the present, a stronger case for a link may emerge.

Labor Omnia Vincit

WAO

 

[Grumpy]

The council presided over a big hole on the route of a connection between the two stations for 10 years recently. They decided to let the new ugly shopping centre be built instead of facilitating the link up of the two station. Of course they now express outrage when NPR doesn't go through Bradford!!!

Indeed. You couldn't make it up.
To be fair Bradford is an unattractive dump and the shopping centre has hardly made it any worse.
They could have had a basic box (sufficient for a two track railway to be installed at some future date) provided under the centre and had both.

 

[matacaster]

Indeed. You couldn't make it up.
To be fair Bradford is an unattractive dump and the shopping centre has hardly made it any worse.
They could have had a basic box (sufficient for a two track railway to be installed at some future date) provided under the centre and had both.

Unhappily I think there is a subterranean car park beneath the shopping centre instead.

 

[zwk500]

Indeed. You couldn't make it up.
To be fair Bradford is an unattractive dump and the shopping centre has hardly made it any worse.
They could have had a basic box (sufficient for a two track railway to be installed at some future date) provided under the centre and had both.

Why would they put in a station box for £<Large number of millions> that can't be used for anything else when there is no sane reason you'd build the railway to serve it?

 

[WAO]

Without adding to the debate and for information only, the difference in heights between the stations is 9.2m, 30'2".

Even if the link were level, the rail height would only be this much above FS.

WAO

(PS I imagine a shopping centre (owner and tenants) would very much like a through station close by and would have eagerly facilitated a box.)

 

[Grumpy]

Why would they put in a station box for £<Large number of millions> that can't be used for anything else when there is no sane reason you'd build the railway to serve it?

I didn't actually say a Station box, merely for a two track railway. However as WAO suggests an underground station might have been attractive to the developers

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 27 Nov 2021 ==

What about a sixty four span viaduct, with each span representing a different crayon from the 64 pack that Crayola do?

You may mock but approx 1977 the then West Yorkshire County Council sponsored WYTCONSULT study did a feasibility of a link which included a multi span viaduct including a high level station at the previous shopping centre

 

[zwk500]

I didn't actually say a Station box, merely for a two track railway. However as WAO suggests an underground station might have been attractive to the developers

Either way, why would you pay a vast amount of money to provide space for a railway there is no sane justification to build? If it was attractive to the developers, they'd have put some money behind it. The very fact that for over 100 years private businesses in Bradford have decided that it is not worth putting any money into such a project suggests that it's very much not needed.

As has been mentioned, this link would not benefit many people making journeys that did not involve Bradford. Therefore the most sensible thing to do would be to provide a rapid transit system that links the two stations via the City Centre.

 

[Grumpy]

Essentially there’s only two ways of doing a cross Bradford link with heavy rail:

1) at ground level, either keeping the current two stations as is, or building a level station between them and closing both. Clearly this requires lots of demolition, including several listed buildings.

2) in tunnel, which is going to need tunnelled approaches from some distance out due to the topography, and would essential cost billions.

Take your pick.

How about cut and cover under the roads between the two routes?

 

[zwk500]

How about cut and cover under the roads between the two routes?

1) are the roads suitably aligned and wide enough? and 2) are the adjacent foundations strong enough to accept a trench deep enough for the sub-grade, track, train clearance and then road deck. This would include vibration issues caused by the trains.

I suspect the answer to both is No, so there's no need to even begin considering the financial calculations (which will come out in very bright red)

 

[Bald Rick]

Would running 11 trains/hour (present 9 plus your 2 extra) really be beyond the wit of railwaymen? And yes I understand the need to cross trains at Apperley and Shipley

Capacity at Leeds....

While I'm sure that the case for Bradford's crossrail is beyond dispute

It is beyond dispute. I have never met a professional railway person who thinks it’s a good idea.

How about cut and cover under the roads between the two routes?

I suggest you look at a map.

 

[30907]

Unhappily I think there is a subterranean car park beneath the shopping centre instead.

FYI it's above it Just where the railway could go.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

The idea of an underground station box underneath the Broadway is extremely ambitious. Rails at Interchange are already 9m above Forster Square and on a downhill gradient from Mill Lane Junction. To get into a box below ground level in a shorter distance than the overall length of the link would be difficult if not impossible.

 

[WAO]

It is beyond dispute. I have never met a professional railway person who thinks it’s a good idea.

Quite right. It is unquestionably a strategic irrelevance. Except for the 350 000 who live there.

WAO

 

[Bald Rick]

Quite right. It is unquestionably a strategic irrelevance. Except for the 350 000 who live there.

WAO

It’s very relevant to those who live there - they’d have about 5 years of significant disruption, and long periods with no train services from at least one of their stations, for no discernible benefit to themselves.

 

[tbtc]

The Airedale line is busiest between Leeds and Apperley Junction. The core service is 6 trains/hour (2 Ilkley, 2 Skipton, 2 Bradford). This rises to seven when a Lancaster or Carlisle runs. In the peak it rises to 9 as 2 extra Ilkleys run (although it's difficult to see the need for these-especially if longer trains were used).
I have no knowledge of the existing signalling capabilities but scrutiny of Realtime trains seems to indicate some actual running at 3 minute headways.
Would running 11 trains/hour (present 9 plus your 2 extra) really be beyond the wit of railwaymen? And yes I understand the need to cross trains at Apperley and Shipley

We've just been spending money on extending Airedale platforms to accommodate six coach trains (and ordered three coach 331s to provide such a service) all because there are no spare paths on the route through Shipley

You may mock but approx 1977 the then West Yorkshire County Council sponsored WYTCONSULT study did a feasibility of a link which included a multi span viaduct including a high level station at the previous shopping centre

Maybe they should have done it then, when there was more scope to knock things down - I just can't see any merit in doing it today (when things would have to be engineered to much more expensive standards)

However we're seeing suggestions of a tunnel or a viaduct or anything to link the two Bradford lines, as if people on here are more interested in removing the buffer stops than trying to solve an actual problem

Quite right. It is unquestionably a strategic irrelevance. Except for the 350 000 who live there.

WAO

Again, what benefit would there be to Bradford?

Would there be any scope for additional services to any new destinations that can't already be provided? No

Would there be any scope for additional services per hour to any existing that can't already be provided? No

So what are the people of Bradford really missing out on?

Nobody seems to know what this is a solution to, it's just that they've seen two sets of buffer stops on a map and can't abide having two railways that don't link up

 

[skyhigh]

We've just been spending money on extending Airedale platforms to accommodate six coach trains (and ordered three coach 331s to provide such a service) all because there are no spare paths on the route through Shipley

Which platforms? Because other than the Leeds work I can't think of any other extensions to allow 6 coach trains - it only works due to ASDO.

 

[Mcr Warrior]

What's a "conciliatory prize"?

 

[fishwomp]

Since Bradford isn't to get a brand new rail line, how about finally crossing the city as a consileration prize ?

Instead of the previously suggested ways of crossing Bradford, it could be a North West to North East chord with a station above the back of the Broadway Shopping centre.

View attachment 106087

With future provision for a chord onto the Calder Valley line using some of the old avoiding line.

Some demolition neccesary but most of it on a new viaduct over the Forster Square retail park.

Your route is almost the right idea in my view: initially to the right of Forster Sq alignment - the road and rail should swap here as per your diagram. No buildings harmed.. some car park tarmac dug up.

Slightly below the red X you drew - bear west to Interchange instead. It's a slight kink but this isn't high-speed.. the only casualty is a car park (on the site of the old Exchange station) and an inflatable castle (not listed, I suggest). Sounds pretty cheap.

Interchange becomes through station, Forster Sq closes.

Calder Valley - Leeds would still reverse for the fastest route: I expect by not being a dead end at the bottom of a steep incline, a long overlap would allow far higher entry speed than current Interchange buffer stops.. but ultimately, for what, a 2 min journey time reduction, I can't see it being value for money.

Perhaps it improves Skipton/Keighley-Manchester (+Ilkley-Manc maybe) connectivity, faster than via Leeds. More sense than Colne-Skipton, but that's not really a high bar to reach.

 

[Bald Rick]

Your route is almost the right idea in my view: initially to the right of Forster Sq alignment - the road and rail should swap here as per your diagram. No buildings harmed.. some car park tarmac dug up.

Slightly below the red X you drew - bear west to Interchange instead. It's a slight kink but this isn't high-speed.. the only casualty is a car park (on the site of the old Exchange station) and an inflatable castle (not listed, I suggest). Sounds pretty cheap.

1) lots of buildings harmed.
2) some listed.
3) not remotely cheap.

It’s not going to happen

 

[WAO]

So what are the people of Bradford really missing out on?

Nobody seems to know what this is a solution to, it's just that they've seen two sets of buffer stops on a map and can't abide having two railways that don't link up

An excellent question.

The elimination of lay-overs creates not only a central concourse but also many journey opportunities. Merseyrail has stated that the Link was not just an operating economy and shopping area access but created many new passenger flows that they never thought would exist, even though 2/3 of Link trains terminate at Central.

Bradfordians and neighbours would really miss the timetable footnote, "Passengers make their own way between Forster Square and Interchange Stations."

I do agree with Bald Rick that the time is not right for this as too much has now been put in the way. That may not always be so.

I think that by "conciliatory prize", the term "consolation prize" was intended.

WAO

 

[Halish Railway]

I’ve had a mess around with my new computer and come up with a way that a ‘Bradford Crossrail’ could work.


All of the above is 2tph. The East Lancashire to Leeds via Bradford service as shown could be turned into a stopping service as shown if Skipton-Colne is built and becomes the primary Lancashire to Yorkshire route.

Bradford Interchange would be rebuilt as an underground station on its current site, facilitated by rebuilding the Bowling curve and creating a temporary station there. The curve could also be kept as a line that diverted trains could take without climbing/descending the deep tunnels into the new underground stations.

More importantly, and why I believe this whole Crossrail project is necessary is that an integrated intermodal transport hub can be created in which all locations within Bradford and the surrounding area can be accessed by public transport. With Trains on one level & on another, Buses & maybe Trams in the future.

Currently you can get a bus into Interchange which is presently connected to a railway station, yet you can’t get a train from there to surrounding towns with various job opportunities & tourist attractions such as Frizinghall (for Lister Park), Shipley, Saltaire, Bingley, Keighley, Steeton & Silsden (for Airedale hospital), Skipton, Baildon, Guiseley & Ilkley. All of those mentioned are either in Bradford Council’s area or have a BD postcode.

I feel that a lot of the talk about Bradford’s public transport overlooks local & internal connectivity, with more long distance connectivity grabbing the spotlight.

In addition, I would transfer the Leeds to Manchester Victoria service over the TPE, so that rolling stock wise, the service can be on a par with what is used on the Huddersfield line. I would also have the service go beyond Manchester Victoria, alternating between Manchester Airport & Liverpool Lime Street. Although all of this should be implemented once the Calder Valley line is electrified and linespeeds increased; 100mph between Manchester Victoria & Rochdale looks perfectly possible and there are many other places where the linespeed could get up to 90mph.

 

[Caboose Class]

Bradford Interchange lies at 112m asl. Forster Square is 103m asl. Once you're down the hill (Bridge Street) and on to Hall Ings, you're on the level all the way to BFS. The distance between the two stations (as the crow flies) is 760m so the gradient is 1 in 84.

 

[Ken H]

There is quite a difference, which I think has been cited in the past as one of the reasons why it wasn’t practical. Quite a drop down from Interchange to the city centre, and I think the line into the station itself has come down quite a way already.

I think historically this is because the Aire Valley route through to Shipley follows the river valley, whereas the Pudsey route climbs quite a bit out of Leeds and stays higher.

Edit to add OS maps indicate an elevation difference of around 10 metres.

add in that if you walk between the 2 stations, you go down hill then up.

 

[fishwomp]

1) lots of buildings harmed.
2) some listed.
3) not remotely cheap.

It’s not going to happen

(1) no buildings harmed - there is a bouncy castle that needs to be moved, but it's not listed and can be reinflated elsewhere.
(2) no buildings harmed
(3) any worse than a typical Bradford road project?

Tunneling from Man Pic to Marsden isn't remotely cheap, but there have been plenty of people in the forum that'd rather do that than re-quadruple to Guide Bridge and reopen Micklehurst Loop, in spite of the obvious cost benefit. The majority in the forum seem to circle the wagons around HS2/HS2 East in spite of the cost.. but heck anyone suggest something that costs the same as a bit of road building, and it's blasphemy - or worse - crayons!!

Here's what I mean - there's a tight curve at one point, road takes the rail route, rail takes the road route for most - so there are no buildings., just car parks and bouncy castles.



Sure, it's not going to happen - I absolutely agree there. It's not going to happen because the votes in Bradford aren't important enough to either party. Every investment decision is either value for money, or it's political, sometimes both.

 

[Grumpy]

The very fact that for over 100 years private businesses in Bradford have decided that it is not worth putting any money into such a project suggests that it's very much not needed.

As has been mentioned, this link would not benefit many people making journeys that did not involve Bradford. Therefore the most sensible thing to do would be to provide a rapid transit system that links the two stations via the City Centre.

Strange logic. If private businesses haven't put money into something for 100 years then it cant be needed. However it would be sensible to provide a rapid transit link despite despite no-one putting any money into that for 100 years.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 28 Nov 2021 ==

Capacity at Leeds....

Which should be relieved by there being fewer trains run

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 28 Nov 2021 ==

It’s very relevant to those who live there - they’d have about 5 years of significant disruption, and long periods with no train services from at least one of their stations, for no discernible benefit to themselves.

Just like HS2 then. Best cancel it then

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 28 Nov 2021 ==

Here's what I mean - there's a tight curve at one point, road takes the rail route, rail takes the road route for most - so there are no buildings., just car parks and bouncy castles.

View attachment 106215

Very good. You could lose a lot of height whilst descending through the court car park.
Did you consider routing through the former Mail Centre site? I dont know what's happening to that but might give a cheaper option
Why would you want to keep the route via Pudsey? A key benefit from the link is getting the cost of that off the Railway's books and all the consequences eg need to Electrify. This could then be a starting point for a West Yorkshire tramway system

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 28 Nov 2021 ==

1) are the roads suitably aligned and wide enough? and 2) are the adjacent foundations strong enough to accept a trench deep enough for the sub-grade, track, train clearance and then road deck. This would include vibration issues caused by the trains.

I suspect the answer to both is No, so there's no need to even begin considering the financial calculations (which will come out in very bright red)

I dont know. This is a speculation thread. You haven't the faintest idea either but use that to make a definite conclusion

 

[Glenn1969]

What is the benefit?

Presumably to eliminate the dead end and reduce journey times by getting rid of the current Interchange time penalty

 

[YorksLad12]

I did read somewhere (probably here, tbh) that one reason Bradford Council decided to locate the magistrates' court and other buildings on the old Exchange site was so that if there ever was a Bradford Crossrail they already owned the land. The two shopping parks are on the old Forster Square site, so it's just the gap in the middle.

Not that I'm in favour of Bradford Crossrail. If the Midland couldn't get it done then, it can't / shouldn't be done now.